NFL considering doing away with PAT's
by pmoose (2014-01-21 07:55:33)
[ cannot delete ]   [ Edit ]   [ Return to Cartier Field ]   [ Show All Thread ]   [ Ignore Poster ]   [ Report Post ]   [ Highlight Poster ]   [ Reply ]

 



I just heard this on the radio this morning. I'm not sure what excitement it would add to change the scoring system. The motivation is because more than 99.5% of PAT's at the NFL level are made.

The article is a bit unclear about alternatives on the table, but one is specifically called out stating a TD will be worth 7, and you get 1 point if you go for the extra point (which is like a 2 point conversion now) and make it but lose a point if you don't.

I'm not sure what coach would consider it. I have to think the probability of making versus missing is close to 50/50, in which case it's lower risk to simply decline to go for it and keep the 7 than to risk losing a point just to get 8. The expected value in either case is 7 points in my estimation, and there is zero risk by not going for it. This won't add excitement at all, so I'm not quite sure why they'd consider it.


Unfortunately, if the NFL did this
by Emil  (2014-01-22 21:44:18)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

then other levels of football, where PATs are not so automatic, would follow suit.


When I played Middle School, a spot kick was 2 points
by shea  (2014-01-23 16:38:24)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

A 2" block was permitted. Our team had at least 4 placekickers who could make a PAT (at least). This was a big advantage over half of our opponents who didn't even have one placekicker. A play from the 2 yard line was worth only 1 point.


first downs are too long!
by cujaysfan  (2014-01-22 11:49:59)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

i think 7 yards is plenty for a first down.


Actually, they'd probably extend the length needed
by dentonfreeman  (2014-01-22 12:54:52)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

for a first down. The NFL's goal seems to be to add more "excitement" to the game. Passing plays are considered more "exciting" than running plays by the powers that be in the NFL, and if they wanted to force teams to pass more they could extend the length need for a first down to, say, 15 or 20 yards. Now teams would be forced to pass at least once per set of downs in order to get another set of downs.


true, but...
by cujaysfan  (2014-01-22 13:08:55)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

the NFL LOVES scoring - so making it easier to extend drives would likely result in increased scoring

perhaps outlawing the handoff would work too


*
by Corky  (2014-01-22 11:26:35)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

*


5 missed PATs out of about 1250 TDs.
by 84david  (2014-01-22 09:04:19)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

That's about as automatic as it gets. The only thing they could do is place the ball at the 30 and kick it from 47 yards to make it at least interesting. Another interesting suggestion is to place the ball on the one for a two pointer. That extra yard closer might make going for two more tempting.


Goodell is displaying Selig tendencies
by sprack  (2014-01-21 23:37:36)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Throwing dumb ideas out there for no good reason.

Who the hell has been complaining about extra points?


Me, for one.
by notredave09  (2014-01-22 07:58:26)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I've been saying this for several years now. They're nearly automatic and a waste of time. Less than 1% are missed.


A goalie on a trampoline. *
by cenjdomer  (2014-01-21 20:02:18)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


kick it in the clown's mouth for 2.5 points *
by abqgant  (2014-01-21 18:04:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


FG > 50 yards = 4 pts. *
by G.K.Chesterton  (2014-01-21 19:03:22)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Don't keep score. Participation ribbons for all. *
by BacTien  (2014-01-21 15:09:58)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


and oatmeal cookies! *
by ProV1x  (2014-01-21 16:29:29)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Hey, who's bringing the orange slices? *
by JoeMcLaughlin  (2014-01-21 18:09:06)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Love to see Belichick at the front of the Parents Tunnel *
by karmel  (2014-01-21 19:09:09)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Narrow the goal posts.
by GreenMachine77  (2014-01-21 14:57:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

NFL kickers make 99% of PAT's and about 85% of field goals. Narrowing the goal posts would make the PAT less automatic and change the risk/reward calculation for field goals promoting going for it on 4th down more. It would also reduce the chance of overtime.


this is the right answer
by vivaflanner  (2014-01-22 09:54:37)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

doesnt require changing the rules, just adjusts for the fact that kickers have become amazingly good. The % of kicks sucessful has been rising for years.


Make it riskier is what I say.
by OITLinebacker  (2014-01-21 14:36:26)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

An PAT from 2.5 yards to the 20 worth 1 point if kicked into the goal, 1 point if thrown into the endzone, and 2 if ran into the endzone defense can return it for 6.

PAT from 20-30 worth 2 if kicked, 2 thrown, and 4 if ran defense can return for 4.

PAT from 30+ worth 3 kicked and thrown and 6 if ran defense can return for 2.

Make the PAT a more interesting play, make comebacks possible, give teams incentive for trying blocks, or taking some risk for a harder try.


I will weep.
by mkovac  (2014-01-21 14:00:29)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The PAT is part of the game.

A blocked PAT is a great play for the defense.

A botched PAT that turns into a great play by the holder can turn into an unexpected two points.

The concept I'm hearing is that the TD will count for 7, but if the team that scored goes for 2 and doesn't make it, then they will go back to getting 6 for the TD.

A score should never have points taken off the board, so I say keep the PAT in.

Again, I'm a Luddite and a traditionalist, so my stance is to be expected.

I don't know why we ever went to facemasks (just kidding).

I say we should bring back the drop kick! (But then we'd have to make the ball look more like a rugby football, and I'm not in favor of that.)

How about this? Change the rules to let the defense launch a guy into the air to block the PAT, like Bob Crable used to do.


Points would never come off the board
by irishlaw2010  (2014-01-21 15:48:58)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

A touchdown would be worth 6 points. At that point, the game would stop, the ref would ask the scoring team would you like to go for two or have a free point (similar to how they ask teams now if they want to accept or decline a penalty).

If they elect to get one point, they get one point and they kickoff.

If they elect to go for two, they go for two, and then they kickoff.

I think they simply need to make getting a PAT harder at the NFL level. Either move the line of scrimmage back on PATs, go to Rugby rules (i.e. kick from the spot of the TD or anywhere on a line perpendicular to the crossbar from the spot of the TD), or narrow the uprights.


Re: kicking from the spot of the TD
by cjr2008  (2014-01-21 16:25:10)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I've seen this mentioned in various places. What happens if you score on a 90 yard play? Is there a maximum distance set for the try? At that point, if you absolutely needed the 7th point, say to tie a game, it could alter your strategy - you might have players running out of bounds at the 1 if the play originated from a distance where the XP would be challenging.


Unclear writing on my part, spot in the endzone where TD
by irishlaw2010  (2014-01-21 16:35:11)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

was scored.

So if I scored on a 90 yard pass play and my player ran into the endzone in the middle of the goal line, I could kick from right in front of the goalposts.

However, if I scored on 2 yard touchdown run on a jet sweep and my ballcarrier scampered into the corner, I would have to kick from the sideline. In order to improve the kicking angle, I could move the ball back from the spot where the ballcarrier entered the endzone as far as I wanted, but that would also increase difficulty by increasing distance.

The link has a diagram under "Points from converting rugby tries" which demonstrates this better than my words.


It wouldn't be from where the play originated, it would be
by coalcracker  (2014-01-21 16:34:28)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

from the point where the player crossed the goal line or on a straight line back from that point to wherever the scoring team felt comfortable that they could make the kick.


That was my thought as well
by beattherush  (2014-01-21 15:53:27)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I would think if they want more excitement they could change the rules on permissible blocking techniques.


this is my feeling too
by ndmaqi  (2014-01-21 14:26:22)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

so what if it is automatic. a QB kneel is automatic as well, should you just end the game early if the winning team has the ball and the other team has no time outs?

keeping it in leaves the option for a fake extra point and prevents the situation where points are removed (which seems weird). You can say "TDs are six. either we give you a free 1 point, or try for 2" but I'd rather see an extra point than a free 1 point...


Why not just get rid of the extra point?
by dentonfreeman  (2014-01-22 02:08:51)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I don't mean get rid of the kick, I mean get rid of the point altogether. After you score a touchdown, worth six points, you run a normal play for two points. That seems to be the point they want to get to, and it's the next logical step after what they're trying to do here.


I'd change that rule too.
by tbonesays  (2014-01-21 17:34:22)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Under 1 minute left, the clock should stop after every play.


PATs and Intentional Walks are somewhat similar
by navyjoe  (2014-01-21 13:22:34)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The professional leagues go through the motions on the off chance that an unlikely mistake will occur. In all my years of watching baseball, I think I've seen one or two wild pitches during intentional walks and maybe a balk.

The 99.8% conversion rate of PATs speaks for itself.

Are there any other plays in sport that are as much of a given as either the PAT or Intentional Walk?


99 percent of dribbles are legal.
by tdiddy07  (2014-01-21 19:31:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Should we do away with traveling and double dribble infractions?


I'm in favor of doing away with basketball *
by NavyJoe  (2014-01-22 18:40:59)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I once saw a player swing at an intentional walk.
by rockmcd  (2014-01-21 13:55:51)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

In fact, he nearly had a game tying intentional walk but was thrown out at home.


Bad News Bears? *
by NavyJoe  (2014-01-21 15:15:45)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Yep. *
by rockmcd  (2014-01-21 16:38:49)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Miguel Cabrera had an RBI single on an intentional walk
by bluengold07  (2014-01-21 14:07:24)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Ted Williams swung at an intentional walk and knocked
by BAC69  (2014-01-21 14:06:59)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

it out of the park. Only problem was he had to step across the plate to hit the ball, so he was called out instead of getting a home run.


Use rugby PAT rules and things would get interesting very
by airborneirish  (2014-01-21 12:57:21)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

fast


They will run
by 2shedsjackson  (2014-01-21 12:20:32)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

an extra commercial in the time the extra point once took. Maybe they can cram that aggravating sea hag Flo from Progressive insurance and stupid kid running with a taco into the time they save by eliminating pat. I'm sure they can get at least two short ads into that time space to maximize profits. I'd rather watch the kick.


They should consider their effect on football the sport
by Sorin107  (2014-01-21 12:13:05)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

If they eliminate it from the NFL, someday college will do the same. And then high school football players will say "why do we still do this?"

I suppose the NFL can get a pay cut from kickers now though to boost their bottom line :).


Oops, I guess I should have looked 4 threads down...
by pmoose  (2014-01-21 10:23:48)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Missed it when I was scanning the board.


I'd rather do away with the two feet in for a catch *
by Up the Irish  (2014-01-21 10:17:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I'd rather go the other way - require two feet in college *
by sprack  (2014-01-21 11:03:25)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Yep. One foot in never made sense to me. *
by 84david  (2014-01-21 14:33:35)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Have to disagree with you both.
by hoomanbeing  (2014-01-21 11:10:45)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

1. They're pros, they should be able to perform at a higher level.

2. They're not pros, they shouldn't have to do that.

I have no problems with the rules differences with college and pros, e.g., having the college hash marks closer to the sidelines than in the pros. (In the pros they line up with the uprights.)


You mentioned the pro hashmarks
by sprack  (2014-01-21 12:16:53)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

If they want to make field goals harder, start by moving the hashmarks back to where they used to be, at least for field goals. NFL kickers never have tough angles.


It shouldn't really change the 2 point decision
by hollownd  (2014-01-21 08:59:56)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The extra point is already basically guaranteed. As you mentioned 99.5% of PATs are made. Coaches would go for the extra point in the same situations they currently go for 2.


But if the point is to add an element of uncertainty...
by pmoose  (2014-01-21 10:20:02)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

...I'm not sure this does that. It basically eliminates the PAT and coaches would only decide to go for the extra point, as you said, in the same situations where they currently go for 2. It basically eliminates any uncertainty that a team will get 7 (since they don't have to kick the PAT, which is still missed around 0.5% of the time), but in late game situations where a team needs 8, they'd go for it risking going back to 6.

I don't care either way, I just don't think this proposed change does what they're looking for...


I don't know if that is the point
by cjr2008  (2014-01-21 10:26:56)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I read it more as the extra point currently adds nothing, so why keep doing it? I don't think they necessarily want to fundamentally change scoring strategy or add a new wrinkle to touchdowns, but just get rid of something that, at the professional level, is somewhat of a relic of the past, when kicking wasn't as certain as it is today.


That's how I read it, although it'll depend on the coaches
by ShermanOaksND  (2014-01-21 12:06:11)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Some will be more inclined to go for 2 than others, at least initially. At some point, I suspect most will just take the 7 as they essentially do now.


I'd be ok. with this. I'd prefer moving it back 15 yards. *
by parietals  (2014-01-21 08:59:28)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


If they moved the PAT back 10-15 yards
by Der Jager  (2014-01-21 14:15:18)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

and the team wanted to go for 2, would they then get to start at the 2 yard line?

I remember a couple of years ago, the Bears scouted a schematic flaw in another team's PAT alignment and successfully ran a fake PAT for 2 points. This type of scouting would be eliminated by changing the PAT rules.

In general, special teams are a unique part of American football strategy, and doing away with the PAT would be another step in removing it (kickoff returns being the other step).


There's an idea
by KeoughCharles05  (2014-01-21 12:51:43)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Bring some uncertainty back to the extra point. Make it a 40 yard kick.

Alternatively, have different points scales for different yardages. Make a 55 yard field goal?


I don't like your second idea because
by Der Jager  (2014-01-21 13:44:08)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

it would punish a team that drove to the opponent's 5 yard line before kicking a FG compared to a team that only drove to the opponent's 25.


Sorry, I meant for extra points.
by KeoughCharles05  (2014-01-21 14:48:36)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The team could have the option of kicking a longer extra point for more points.


The biggest change would be to scoring records and FF
by DakotaDomer  (2014-01-21 08:40:55)     Delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Not much change to typical gameplay.


The contents of this post represent the views of the author. NDNation.com is not responsible for its contents.